I've never thought my Canon EF was particularly loud Flavio, but it did have a complete service about three years ago.Agree. My Canon EF is my loudest 35mm SLR, it also has the Copal vertical shutter.
The quietest one is the Minox 35, and by far !!
Dave T, Greg Weber would be happy to repair your Konica FP [gweber@webercamera.com]. I have two nicely working FP cameras with shiny 52/1.4 lenses. The FP is no lightweight and yes, it is loud. I like the beautiful finder and enjoy using them.
I have a sound level meter which was originally purchased for balancing multichannel speakers for home theater. I just did measurements using A-weighted scale, all cameras set to 1/60 f/4, at a distance of 12" from front of camera body to sound level meter.
(did you really think the aperture would nake a difference?!!).
I am not a sound expert but I can tell you that decibel levels alone do not tell the whole story. There is the pitch of the sound, the duration of all of the sounds and the number of different sounds.
Not so much shutter noise as film advance - a Koni Omega 6x7 roll film back on one of the Koni press cameras. Advance a frame and it sounds like you just cranked up a two-stroke chainsaw motor.
The Canon T70 shutter isn't too loud but the film advance should have guidelines for ear protection.
I always thought it was more like the sound of cycling a pump shot gun
I 'm surprised that photograph is allowed in U.S courts , It certainly Isn't in British ones.
These days the more sensational cases are televised (e.g. Jodi Arias trial). The reason given is that the public has the right to know what is happening in a trial (nothing hidden). A case could be made that simple reporting without cameras can still satisfy this. However, the media enjoy any ratings success and viewership it brings them. There's also the argument that the presence of cameras affects the trial (e.g. the O.J. Simpson circus).
I 'm surprised that photograph is allowed in U.S courts , It certainly Isn't in British ones.
These days the more sensational cases are televised (e.g. Jodi Arias trial). The reason given is that the public has the right to know what is happening in a trial (nothing hidden). A case could be made that simple reporting without cameras can still satisfy this. However, the media enjoy any ratings success and viewership it brings them. There's also the argument that the presence of cameras affects the trial (e.g. the O.J. Simpson circus).
If the judge permits it then photography is allowed. Now days it is pretty common to see cameras but the judge can certainly revoke that permission if you are using a camera with a loud, distracting shutter.
If the judge permits it then photography is allowed. Now days it is pretty common to see cameras but the judge can certainly revoke that permission if you are using a camera with a loud, distracting shutter.
So magnesium flash powder is out then?!
Steve.
Pentax 6x7 sounds like a shotgun going off.
The WideLux has a distinctive wrrr, the my noisiest goes to my Hasselblad 503 CX, Pacemaker Speed Graphic and Graflex Model D. The Hasselblad has a distinctive THUNK while the focal plane 4"x5" shutters have distinctive ZZZZIPPPP Thunk of their own.
So magnesium flash powder is out then?!
Steve.
What??
When did that happen???
Darn I wish someone would tell me these things. Now what am I going to do with those two 55 gallon steel drums of the stuff I had delivered to the house the other day?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?